tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post1891103773570601674..comments2014-01-20T16:37:33.536+10:00Comments on Interpose Mission: The Face on Mars FarceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-17220820017723734742013-01-20T10:20:48.232+10:002013-01-20T10:20:48.232+10:00Hmmmm you only answered one question, but that doe...Hmmmm you only answered one question, but that does not matter. I guess we agree to disagree then. <br /><br />For I do firmly believe the Face on Mars was created by design and not randomness. It is four complete pictures cut in half and each of those four halves joined together and this image is carved on a rocky mesa to create what we all know as the Face on Mars. It was created that each side was to be cut in half and mirrored to reveal individual pictures as I show in my video, which no one can deny shows images of earths ancient cultures, such as yourself, but you say they are just pareidolia. <br /><br />If I took a black and white photograph of a tree and cut it straight down the centre and threw one half away and took the remaining half and mirror it over and join both halves together, then trace all the outlines and details within it, then apply colour to that traced image, would it be an artistic representation of a symmetrical tree or a pareidolia?<br /><br />I understand why you want to avoid going too far into a critique on my presentation, as you would have to show what I have done and to do so would reveal the truth. <br />Daniel Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09345287721095748388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-38171357140477993232013-01-19T22:39:41.293+10:002013-01-19T22:39:41.293+10:00The feature exists, but our perception of it is ve...The feature exists, but our perception of it is very much affected by the potential for pareidolia, which is basically the tendency for human beings to recognize visual patterns even in randomness, which is, to some extent what occurs in the natural environment. I want to avoid going too far into a critique of your presentation, as I am not sure that would be of much use or interest to anyone. My position: the Face is not a face, nor is it any other artistic representation.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-37563359659594243032013-01-19T21:25:13.124+10:002013-01-19T21:25:13.124+10:00G’day Mr Janssen, don’t worry about the name but t...G’day Mr Janssen, don’t worry about the name but thank you anyways. Also thank you for your comments they are greatly appreciated. <br /><br />I myself thought the very same things until I investigated the Face on Mars’s reality, its truth for myself. And that truth I can honestly say is the held opinion by the majority, which is, the Face on Mars image taken and then released in 2001 by N.A.S.A is 100% exactly what it shows it is. Every detail of the cliffs, ridges, peaks, craters, its textures and arrangements of its rocks and soils, that are on the surface of the Face on Mars in the Cydonia area are 100% in the image released in 2001 by N.A.S.A. and is unaltered. <br /><br />I believe this must be the foundation of anyone’s investigations into the Face on Mars and the united opinion of anyone truthfully debating it. Would you Mr Janssen be in agreement with this??? <br /><br />As to your comments, are you saying that you do and can see what I am presenting? As an example the first Picture I presented in the video titled - the Egyptian falcon god Horus and the cat goddess Bastet and a long faced Pharaoh, you do see what I present as Horus or a falcon head or resemblance of them as in the examples I show in the video??? But as to how I achieved these images you, correct me if I’m wrong, believe are produced by forced bilateral symmetry and is the psychological effect of imagined perceptions of patterns or meanings where they do not actually exist??? So more or less I’ve used only my imagination, which is the forming of mental images or concepts of what is not actually present to the senses. But this is not accurate as the Face on Mars and its reality ARE present to the senses.<br /><br />You commented in middle school you drew what your imagination thought was in the paper when looking at it way to closely, but in reality nothing was there. This is far from what I have done.<br />What I have presented however, the lines I have followed by tracing the cliffs, craters, boulders and ridge edges that are over the entire mound and if you agree with what I believe the foundation of this debate is, those lines are 100% there and are not imagination as the structure and the condition of the Face on Mars surface is in reality there and real. I need not to imagine their existence.<br /><br />As to the mirroring process I did to achieve these pictures, the halves un-mirrored are still there and can still be seen clearly on the original picture. The debate is not mirroring but what is produced by reflecting half of the original image in reversal and both halves joined together. What it shows is the actual details on the Face on Mars, but is labelled as pareidolia because one half is mirrored. Everyone forgets the details in reality exist on that one half mirrored. <br /> <br />What is your proof then that the Face on Mars and the condition of its surface do not exist in reality???<br />Daniel Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09345287721095748388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-53906956573258682622013-01-19T08:46:20.119+10:002013-01-19T08:46:20.119+10:00Mr. Schroeder (sorry for the misspelling earlier),...Mr. Schroeder (sorry for the misspelling earlier),<br /><br />I saw your video. After watching it, I feel more confident in the psychological effect known as pareidolia. It reminds me of when I was bored in middle school and would draw on a piece of paper, but I only drew what I thought I already saw in the paper when I looked way too closely at it. I found many faces or portions of them. What your technique does is force bilateral symmetry onto the image so that a face and other features of bilaterally-symmetrical animals are likely to come out when one uses one&#39;s imagination. I have not changed my opinion of the Face on Mars.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-88084091794875727322013-01-18T18:32:14.029+10:002013-01-18T18:32:14.029+10:00Mr. Shroeder,
I take your challenge. When I have ...Mr. Shroeder,<br /><br />I take your challenge. When I have time, I will look at the video, even though I am pretty sure I won&#39;t be converted by the video. I will report back the result.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-4129030344893851812013-01-18T11:05:19.402+10:002013-01-18T11:05:19.402+10:00I would have to say Richard C. Hoagland is right a...I would have to say Richard C. Hoagland is right about the Face on mars and about mirroring it. I discovered something that might interest you that proves Richard C.Hoagland is right. Google search - the face on mars mystery 100% solved - and click the Youtube link. You will change your mind after watching it.Daniel Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09345287721095748388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-45514031949432022142013-01-07T13:34:02.031+10:002013-01-07T13:34:02.031+10:00Thank you for the useful correction, Stu. I had mi...Thank you for the useful correction, Stu. I had mistaken part of a shot in GoogleMars for a crater.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-14621868807518729412013-01-07T07:41:14.288+10:002013-01-07T07:41:14.288+10:00Also, there&#39;s no crater on the face. At least...Also, there&#39;s no crater on the face. At least nothing &gt;~1 meter (looking at the HiRISE). The &quot;nose&quot; is a positive feature.astroguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04807615605691873999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-66428314828077000742013-01-07T07:04:34.893+10:002013-01-07T07:04:34.893+10:00Expat,
Thanks. I will correct that.Expat,<br /><br />Thanks. I will correct that.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-84163870291666190422013-01-07T02:30:42.110+10:002013-01-07T02:30:42.110+10:00Julian, both you and I have mis-labeled face image...Julian, both you and I have mis-labeled face imagery. The second image in your post is not the &quot;catbox&quot; image of Mars Global Surveyor, 1998. It&#39;s the much better image from later in the same mission.<br /><br />My mistake was labeling it as the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter image from 2007. I&#39;m trotting off to correct that now.expathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10369924104634464934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-23080067141380399142013-01-06T23:56:32.987+10:002013-01-06T23:56:32.987+10:00I am not sure what you mean by this. Generally, hu...I am not sure what you mean by this. Generally, human faces and the faces of other creatures tend to be bilaterally symmetrical, more or less.Julian Janssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14235846531323511190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7302648013550565615.post-61095564130357000832013-01-06T19:34:33.033+10:002013-01-06T19:34:33.033+10:00I agree, the &#39;face on Mars&#39; isn&#39;t...Bu...I agree, the &#39;face on Mars&#39; isn&#39;t...But I have to take you to task on the human face being symetrical. That isn&#39;t common at all..And we as humans tend to find the more a face IS symetrical, it&#39;s more attractive. As an experiment just scan a selection of face on mug shots, cut them in half and flip them to see what I mean. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com